|
|
| |
| |
Editorial
06/2006 |
|
Social inclusion
Football stirs emotions: excitement, joy, triumph – as well as disappointment and anger. The politically most relevant emotion, however, is the sense of togetherness a team’s supporters develop. International soccer matches go along with nationalist sentiment. This is particularly so in the case of World Cup competitions, which grab attention the world over, with interest increasing from match to match. Finals are watched by a huge TV audience, in which those unable of explaining the offside rules probably outnumber those who can. Every one, however, can tell “us” from “them”.
One should not underestimate the relevance of sports for boosting collective identities. That is welcome, for instance, when a star from a background of deprivation becomes a living symbol of anti-racism. Just consider Brazilian football legend Pelé. He still embodies notions such as fair play and equal opportunity.
Sadly, senses of shared identity also have dark sides. The World Cup in 1978 served the propaganda purposes of Argentina’s military rulers, who took advantage of the event in a way related to how the Nazis exploited the Berlin Olympics in 1936. Similarly, China’s leaders will probably use the Beijing games in 2008 to stir patriotic pride, but hardly to promote human rights.
Fan violence is another dark side. In May, German media anxiously covered football-related riots in some neighbouring countries as well as how German police was preparing for the World Cup. It was stressed that club matches are more likely to spark brawls than encounters of national teams. When 39 fans died in Brussels in 1985, after Belgian police and stadium organisation had hopelessly failed to control English hooligans, the match in question was not between national teams. Juventus Turin was playing Liverpool FC.
The German police have done international homework to make sure they will avoid catastrophes like that. For officers on duty, however, it hardly matters whether club teams or national selections are competing in the stadium. During the World Cup tournament in France eight years ago, German hooligans beat and crippled a French policeman. His German colleagues are quite aware of his depressing fate.
Sociologically, however, it is relevant that violence levels tend to be lower at international matches. It shows that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, identities are divided. Otherwise, hooliganism could not be rooted deeper in local rivalry than in nationalist élan. Many supporters of Germany’s national team normally resent highly-paid stars of Bundesliga champion Bayern Munich. But they will roaringly support them when dressed in the national colours. On the other hand, even the most loyal Bayern fans will not cheer on their club’s heroes playing for other nations. Similarly, most Rhinelanders would rather watch the Brazilian team win than the Dutch one from right across the border. The same Rhinelanders, however, would probably much prefer their daughter to marry a Dutchman, compared with someone from Latin America.
People are capable of diverse loyalties and bonds, depending on cause and context. Where a language, religion, region, ethnic group, social class or soccer team are unduly emphasised, we are dealing with social pathology, not normal human behaviour. Social inclusion is the best preventive means against excessive violence. This insight has political implications. After all, a lot can be done to ensure that, in any given society, individuals have more than one single community, cause or group they can identify with.
Dr. Hans Dembowski
Editor in Chief of D+C Development and Cooperation/E+Z Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit
euz.editor@fsd.de
|
|
|
